首页> 外文期刊>IEEE Communications Magazine >Voice over MPLS compared to voice over other packet transport technologies
【24h】

Voice over MPLS compared to voice over other packet transport technologies

机译:MPLS语音与其他分组传输技术的语音相比

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Most major carriers are deploying multiprotocol label switching (MPLS) and are also migrating voice traffic to packet transport. This article analyzes how those trends can be combined. It compares the advantages of VoMPLS with VoATM, VoIP, and VoFR, from the viewpoints of bandwidth utilization, implementation issues, and the region of the network (access/backbone) in which implementation takes place. VoMPLSoPPP is more efficient than VoMPLSoATM or VoMPLSoEthernet. In the network backbone VoMPLSoPPP is most efficient. VoAAAL2oATM has intermediate efficiency, and VoIP is highly inefficient. In the access network use of header compression improves the efficiency of VoIP but does not bring it to the level of VoAAL2oATM, which is approximately as efficient as VoMPLSoEthernet. VoMPLSoPPP remains most efficient.
机译:大多数主要运营商都在部署多协议标签交换(MPLS),并且还将语音流量迁移到数据包传输。本文分析了如何结合这些趋势。从带宽利用率,实现问题以及实现的网络区域(访问/骨干)的角度,它比较了VoMPLS与VoATM,VoIP和VoFR的优势。 VoMPLSoPPP比VoMPLSoATM或VoMPLSoEthernet更有效。在网络骨干网中,VoMPLSoPPP是最有效的。 VoAAAL2oATM具有中等效率,而VoIP效率很低。在接入网中,头压缩的使用可以提高VoIP的效率,但不能达到VoIP的效率,而VoAAL2oATM的效率几乎与VoMPLSoEthernet一样。 VoMPLSoPPP仍然是最有效的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号